World of Philosophy

Author(s): Christopher Key Chapple, Intaj Malek, Dilip Charan, Sunanda Shastri, Prashant Dave
Publisher: Shanti Prakashan

Page 815

nature of duality, and is therefore false. In other words, the knowledge of identity, which seeks to terminate Avidyā, is itself false80 (Nivrttyanupapatti). By all these arguments, Rāmānuja concludes that the doctrine of Mayā creates more problems than solutions. So, it is not at all helpful in solving philosophical problems.
Pārthasarathi Miśra, a follower of Kumārila school of Mimāmsā, thinks that the concept of Māyā or Avidyā, is irrational. His main question against the concept of Avidyā is : 'Is Avidyā false knowledge ? or is its cause different from it ? If Avidyā is false knowledge, it either belongs to Brahman or Jīvas. It cannot belong to Brahamn because Brahman is of the nature of eternal knowledge. Jīvas are also non-different from Brahman in their essential nature, So, they cannot have false knowledge. Thus, Avidyā, the false knowledge does not exist. Therefore, its cause, which is different from it, cannot exist. If Avidyā, the false knowledge or its cause be said to exist, separate from Brahman, then Advaita is undermined. If Avidyā exists in Brahman, what is its cause? It cannot be anything different from Brahman, nor can it be Brahman since it is of the nature of right knowledge. It cannot contradict its nature. So, existence of Avidyā cannot be proved. 81 Even Vijñānabhikṣu, in his introduction of Sārkhyapravacanabhāsya, like Bhaskara, quotes a verse from Padmapurana, and says Māyāvāda is hidden Buddhism. Criticism of Māyāvāda is found in the works of Madhva, 83 Vallabh84 and in other Vaisnava philosophers. There arguments against Māyāvāda are more or less similar to those of Bhāskara, Vidyānanda and Rāmānuja. In defence of Māyāvāda
Bhaskarācārya quoting a verse from Padmapurāna was the first philosopher to apply the term Māyāvāda to Sankara's philosophy. Bhāskarācārya's terming Sankara's philosophy as Māyāvāda is unjustifiable, because, it is not Māyā but Brahman with which Sankara is concerned. Māyā, the mysterious power of the supreme Lord is not the last word with Sankara. It is not the goal of human aspiration. It is something that deserves to be discarded and got rid of. Throughout Sankara’s writings, it is realization of the Brahman, and not of the Māyā that is really aimed. And whenever Māyā is brought in, it is not with a view to make his reader realize its importance or value, but in order to direct his mind towards the realization of his all important Brahman. “Brahman, with Sankara, is the only true
766